ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2025
A landscape analysis of investors in the global breast milk substitute industry to target for advocacy.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Capitalising (on) industrial epidemics: examining the influence of the 'Big Three' asset managers on corporate governance in key health-harming commodity industries.Globalization and health · 2026Article
- The Corporate Political Activity of the infant commercial milk formula industry in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic.International breastfeeding journal · 2025Article
- Strategic decoupling through legitimacy: the sustainability-innovation gap in the food processing sector and its health implications.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- A landscape analysis of investors in the global breast milk substitute industry to target for advocacy.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes and subsequent resolutions (the Code) was adopted to address increases in mortality and morbidity resulting from the practices of the breast-milk substitute (BMS) industry. The lack of success in ensuring company compliance with the Code has prompted advocates to consider engaging with investors to shape the governance of BMS companies. To support these efforts, this paper aimed to identify prominent investors in the global BMS industry and explore their Code-related policies and practices. Using multiple methods and data sources, we developed a novel approach to identify and rank investors in the world's leading publicly listed BMS companies. We also examined the policies and voting behaviour of a sample of investors using publicly accessible materials from 2020 to 2022. We found that a small number of large investors, led by BlackRock and Vanguard, hold a substantial share in the global BMS industry. Of the top-10 ranked investors, only Norway's Government Pension Fund (NBIM) reported policy information relating specifically to BMS marketing. Most of these large investors also opposed the sample of public health-related shareholder proposals analysed. In addition, we identified several investors that have reported engaging with BMS companies on Code-related issues, including NBIM, Pictet, and UBS, along with several potential investor targets for future advocacy efforts, including some North American public pension funds. The inclusion of Code-related issues as part of broader policies, disclosures and regulations related to environmental, social and governance oriented investment warrants increased attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.